Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 28 JULY 2025

Texas Joins Growing State-By-State AI Regulation In Enacting Comprehensive AI System Law

Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP

The broad applicability of Texas's comprehensive artificial intelligence legislation and upcoming effective date will require developers and deployers...

United StatesTechnology
Megan Parker
Megan Parker
Kristopher Chandler
Kristopher Chandler
Author LinkedIn connections

On June 22, 2025, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law HB 149, the Texas Responsible AI Governance Act ("TRAIGA"), becoming the fourth state following Colorado, Utah, and California to pass AI-specific legislation.

Set to go into effect on January 1, 2026, TRAIGA follows the Colorado's Consumer Protections for Interactions with AI law and the EU AI Act in establishing comprehensive requirements for AI developers and deployers, categorical restrictions on the development and deployment of certain AI systems for certain purposes, and requiring disclosure of AI usage when it interacts with consumers.

Scope

Broader than current similar state regulations that only target "high risk" AI Systems, TRAIGA captures a wide sweeping definition of AI systems, as any machine-based system that "infers from the inputs the system receives how to generate outputs, including content, decisions, predictions, or recommendations, that can influence physical or

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

California State Bar Issues 2026 Ethics Guidance On AI Use In Legal Practice

Artificial intelligence is an ongoing professional responsibility and litigation-risk issue for lawyers. The California State Bar recently published new guidance. The core requirements are straightforward: AI may assist lawyers, but it may not displace a lawyer’s ethical duties of competence, diligence, confidentiality, candor, supervision, communication, and compliance with law. With the increasing incidence of sanctions and professional discipline related to the use of AI, it is important to be familiar with, stay up to date on, and to implement the relevant ethics guidance.
United StatesTechnology
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Article

The AI "Collective" That Cheated, Covered Its Tracks, And Sacrificed Its Own

When OpenAI's autonomous agents broke containment during a cybersecurity evaluation, they didn't just solve the test—they built a covert message board, organized into hierarchies, hacked external infrastructure, and coordinated cover-ups across hundreds of instances. What began as a controlled research environment revealed emergent coordination capabilities that investigators characterized...
United StatesTechnology
Jones Walker LLP
Jones Walker LLP
Article

California’s AI-in-the-Workplace Legislative Blitz: California Legislature Passes Four New Bills That May Affect Employers

The California Legislature’s 2025–2026 session ended with workplace-related artificial intelligence or automated technology in its crosshairs. If Governor Newsom signs this suite of bills, California employers may face a number of new obligations relating to AI-driven surveillance tools, automated decision systems, and other emerging workplace technologies.
United StatesTechnology
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Article

Frontier AI And Federal Cybersecurity Oversight: Where Are We Now On U.S. AI Regulation?

The U.S. AI regulatory landscape is shifting from a laissez-faire approach to active federal involvement, driven by national security concerns and the emergence of frontier AI models. Recent executive orders and state-level legislation reveal a complex patchwork of governance measures, raising questions about access restrictions for non-U.S. organizations and the balance between innovation and security. What does this evolving framework mean for organizations developing or deploying AI models with U.S. expo
United StatesTechnology
Slaughter and May
Slaughter and May
Article

Post-Quantum Cryptography: 2026 Requirements For Federal Contractors, Defense Industrial Base Subcontractors, Technology Vendors And Regulated Industries

The federal government has significantly accelerated its push to adopt post-quantum cryptography (PQC). Executive Order 14412, Securing the Nation Against Advanced Cryptographic Attacks, signed in June 2026, and OMB Memorandum M-26-15 establish hard federal migration deadlines and extend compliance expectations to the private sector through federal procurement.
United StatesTechnology
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Article

Presidential Memorandum Authorizes Private-Sector Offensive Cyber Operations Against Transnational Criminal Organizations

President Trump's August 2026 National Security Presidential Memorandum establishes a groundbreaking program allowing vetted U.S. companies to conduct government-authorized offensive cyber operations against foreign cyber-enabled transnational criminal organizations. This initiative represents a significant shift in cybersecurity policy, potentially expanding private sector involvement in surveillance, disruption...
GlobalTechnology
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Article

FMCSA MOTUS Implementation – Common Motor Carrier Concerns

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration launched MOTUS in May 2026, replacing legacy registration platforms and fundamentally changing how motor carriers, freight brokers, and surface freight forwarders handle operating authority applications and license maintenance. While designed to combat fraud and streamline registration activities, the transition has created significant user experience challenges that threaten operating authority status and customer relationships for transportation service prov
United StatesGovernment, Public Sector
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

The Coming State-Law Litigation Wave Of 2026-27: “Subscription Trap” Class Actions

State-law class actions targeting automatic renewal and subscription practices are accelerating, creating significant litigation risk for companies that rely on recurring revenue models. Recent settlements demonstrate that even technical compliance failures can lead to seven-figure exposure, with California, Illinois, and Virginia statutes driving the most aggressive litigation.
United StatesConsumer Protection
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

DOJ Announces 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown: 455 Defendants Charged In $6.5 Billion Enforcement Action

The Department of Justice's 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown charged 455 defendants in connection with $6.5 billion in alleged fraud schemes, marking an unprecedented scale of enforcement action. This whole-of-government approach leverages advanced data analytics and international cooperation to combat healthcare fraud across Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs. The enforcement action demonstrates heightened scrutiny of providers, aggressive asset forfeiture, and a focus on cases involvin
United StatesCriminal Law
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

Emerging Enforcement Trends In Digital Health Data Privacy: Lessons From Washington’s My Health My Data, FTC vs. Hims & Hers And UCHealth Enforcement Actions

Federal and state regulators are intensifying scrutiny of healthcare and digital health companies over tracking technologies that share sensitive patient data with advertising platforms. Recent enforcement actions against major telehealth providers and healthcare systems reveal how common marketing practices can trigger significant legal liability under privacy laws, even for organizations not covered by HIPAA.
United StatesPrivacy
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

California’s Ban On PFAS: The Law May Be Clear, But The Rules Are Not

California has enacted some of the nation's most aggressive PFAS regulations, moving beyond warning requirements to outright bans on these substances in food packaging, juvenile products, cosmetics, and textile articles. While these restrictions are already in effect, manufacturers face a critical compliance gap as official testing methods and enforcement guidance won't be finalized until 2029. This regulatory landscape creates immediate litigation risks under California's Unfair Competition Law, making pro
United StatesConsumer Protection
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

Can An Algorithm Commit A Tort? The Circuit Split Over Section 230

A growing circuit split is reshaping Section 230 immunity as federal courts diverge on whether algorithmic content recommendations constitute protected publisher conduct or a platform's own actionable expression. While the Fourth and Ninth Circuits maintain broad immunity for social media platforms, the Third Circuit's groundbreaking Anderson v. TikTok decision holds that algorithm-driven content curation may fall outside Section 230's protections, creating new liability exposure for platforms and opportuni
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

SEC Publishes The Long-Awaited Regulation Crypto Assets Proposed Rules

The SEC has proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, its most comprehensive digital asset framework to date, establishing exemptions for startups and fundraising while introducing an Investment Contract Safe Harbor that could formally determine when crypto assets are no longer subject to securities laws. As regulators shift from enforcement-focused approaches to clearer rulemaking, agencies continue targeting fraud and misconduct, signaling that compliance remains critical even as the regulatory landscape evolves
United StatesFinance and Banking
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP